Somaliland Merits Recognition. Here are the reasons!
This piece was in response to the Emeritus Professor Woodward,
University of Reading, England who se article entitle “Somaliland
wants to secede – Here’s why caution…) on 9 September 2016 which w
as featured in the Australian Journal ‘The Conversation’.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Professor put forth a cautionary statement about the recognition
of Somaliland. The professor is determined to propagate a cheap
propaganda based on his ignorance about the peculiar history and
politics of Somaliland. The article shows a great gap of knowledge
about Somaliland and its people.
The professor wrongly described Somaliland as a secessionist. With
due respect I would like to strong ly remind him that Somaliland is
not (and has never been) a region or a territory seceding from a cou
ntry called “Somalia”. Unerringly this is where the professor’s
argument buckles. The professor show ed fatigue and lack of the
proper desk research work or should I say he is out rightly
dishonest about Somaliland and it apparently seems the latter.
In 1991, after the collapse of
the Somali government and the defeat of its national troops by the
SN M, Somaliland withdrew from the union between the two independent
states (Somaliland and Somalia Italiana/South Somalia), reclaimed
its lost independence and clawed back its territorial integrity.
Nonetheless, Somaliland has the right to abrogate from the union
according to the international law.
The history of Somaliland is uniquely and distinctly different from
that of Somalia. Somaliland has bee n a Protectorate (British
Somaliland Protectorate) for about 76 years before it achieved its
indepen dence from Britain on 26 June 1960. Its borders have been
clearly demarcated through treaties and international agreements.
Britain made agreements with other European colonial regimes and the
Eth iopian Emperor (The Anglo-French Treaty of 1888; The
Anglo-Italian Treaty of 1894 and The Anglo-Et hiopian Treaty of 1897
respectively. Therefore, the borders of Somaliland are constituted
and deline ated by the international law.
Soon after gaining its independence on 26 June 1960, the independent
state of Somaliland voluntarily joined with ‘La Somalia Italiana’ in
the South on its independence (from Italy) day of 1 July 1960. On
its independence 35 member countries (including of course Britain
and the US) recognised Somaliland. Even the then US Secretary of
State, Christian Herter, congratulated it. Somaliland was also
invited to the British Commonwealth of nations. A point to be born
in mind is that both Somaliland and Italian Somaliland were
independent separate states when they united. However, after nearly
31 years (of a loose unratified illegal union), Somaliland
voluntarily withdrew from the union. Somaliland’s with dra wal is,
therefore, a case of dissolution of a botched union. There are
successful precedents including African states which are today
independent states with no border problems dismissing the view the
professor blindly envisages. The professor deliberately selected
failed or problem cases (the Biafra region, the Katanga region,
South Sudan and Eritrean) but utterly ignored a whole lot of other
indep endent states that do exist in the African continent that have
successfully separated from unions [(the united Arab Republic union
between Egypt and Syria which was dissolved in 1961; the union
between French Sudan and Senegal (the Malian Federation) that was
dissolved in 1960; Senegambia (Gambia and Senegal) which was
dissolved in 1989)] as well as in the rest of the world (see the
chain of breakdown of federations of the former USSR and
Yugoslavia), East Timor among others.
The professor subscribes to the most deceptive hypothetical delusive
political argument that reckle ssly opposes to the recognition of
Somaliland and which attracts rather few loony individuals. Each
case has its own merit and the examples the professor picked up have
no relevance to the case of Somaliland.
Somaliland has been out of the
failed state of Somalia for 25 years. Since then Somaliland made
consi derable achievements that Somalia did not dream of. Somaliland
came out of the ashes of ruins. It pr oved itself as a shining
beacon of hope, peace and a model of democracy in the African
continent. The lasting peace, security and stability Somaliland
enjoys today were brought at a price and throug h a comprehensive
process of reconciliations and peace negotiations that no other
country coming out conflict, including Somalia, has used. Among the
international community Somaliland is well ‘recog nised’ as an oasis
of peace in an otherwise turbulent region (including the
neighbouring violence in Somalia). It has taken full advantage of
democratic principles and formation of pluralistic society. Since
its withdrawal, Somaliland made four free and fair democratic
elections (two presidential elec tions, a parliamentary and a
municipality election) witnessed by international observers and
covered by the world media. Four presidents, elected through the
ballot have thus far changed presidencies. The professor is well
aware of the third presidential election and a parliamentary
election planned to occur in Somaliland in 2017.
The fact that a presidential
candidate lost vote by a mere 80 votes and, at the same time,
conceded defeat is extraordinarily a miracle in the world. It
happened in Somaliland in 2005. That shook the wo rld in surprise so
much so that such kind of transfer of power is not popular in
Africa. But neverthel ess, that shows how serious Somaliland is
about the principles of democracy while Somalia is stuck in the 4.5
clan code system (marginalising minority clans) by the dominant
tribes in the South. Somalia has not yet stepped on the democracy
ladder. What is holding the professor back from siding with the
moral imperative, humanity, the social stability and democratic
politics of Somaliland rather than dragging the progressive back to
the weak unstable chaotic Somalia.
The professor again argues that the AU should be opposed to the
recognition of Somaliland. What a travesty! The professor has out
rightly discounted the reality that the AU Charter itself explicitly
su pports Somaliland in principle but the AU chose to be silent of
the truth. Was it not in 2005 that the AU admitted that the legality
of Somaliland’s case is out of question but rather that Somaliland
rema ins in current political limbo for political reasons? Clauses
of the AU Charter clearly stress the inviola bility of colonial
borders and enforcing African leaders to respect. To put the
professor in the perspe ctive in the late 1960s the late president
of Tanzania, Julius Nyrere, strongly warned African countr ies not
to violate the colonial borders. It was that same clause of the AU
Charter (the then OAU) wh ich was used for stopping Somali Republic
to claim the other Somali-inhabited territories (NFD, Somalis in
Ethiopia and Djibouti).
In addition, the colonial borders of Somaliland have been confirmed
by the AU Fact-Finding mission (le d by the Deputy Chairperson,
Patrick Mazimbaka) in 2005 to Somaliland. The Mission’s official
report clearly expressed and concluded that Somaliland’s case is
unique and self-justified in the African poli tical history and,
therefore, should not be linked to the notion of ‘opening a Pandora
box as the profe ssor argues. Once more, Somaliland is not causing
the disintegration the colonial borders of Somalia which it
inherited from its European coloniser (Italy). The professor is
perplexed and feels sulky by the AU’s delusional policy.
Somaliland is set for recognition. Somaliland ticks all the boxes of
statehood and it has undoubtedly established the most democratic
political system in the entire Horn of Africa according to the Econ
omist Magazine (Nov. 2015). It has achieved all accoutrements of a
government and has a democra tically elected government and
parliament. Somaliland is engaged with other independent states and
deals with the international community.
Historically it was the Greater Somalia notion or Somali unity that
necessitated the bringing of all So mali-speaking people in the Horn
of Africa region under one banner. The concept began with the Som
ali nationalism to bring about all five Somali-inhabited lands
(Somaliland, Somalis in Ethiopia, Somalis in NFD in Kenya, Somalis
in South Somalia, and Somalis in Djibouti) under one flag. That was
the birth of Somali irredentism. The union of the two (Somaliland
and Italian Somalia) was one step forward to that dream and the fate
of the greater Somalia at the time has been a sacrosanct issue for
all Som alis. But nevertheless, that proved to be a grand ambition,
surreal and practically unrealisable dream. Siad Barre’s war with
Ethiopia in 1977/78 was part and parcel of that package or dream. In
the end that doomed to failure and the concept faltered apart long
ago since each Somali-inhabited territory went on its own way one
after the other like a cascading domino. The NFD is now of Kenya
since its independence in 1963; Djibouti Somalis together with Afar
became independent in 1977 and Somali-inhabited lands in Eastern
Ethiopia (the area commonly known by foreigners as the Ogaden
together with the Haud and Reserve Area is now the 5th region as
part of the Ethiopian Federation. In 1991 Somaliland withdrew from
the union of the two. Therefore, Somali unity is only a delusive and
unthinkable idea. Somaliland’s withdrawal from the union finally put
the nail on the coffin of the Pan Somalia notion. The union of two
does not mean the unity of Somalis under Somalia as some argue.
Somaliland complies with the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and
Duties of States, a convent ion that holds the conditions of
statehood: a permanent population, a defined territory, a
functioning government, and the capacity to enter relations with
other states.
The Somaliland people who chose to unite with Somalia after
achieving independence in 1960 from Br itain. It was a peoples’
choice then and it is the peoples’ wish and right again to reclaim
their indepen dence again. The fact that one-million people signed a
petition clearly pinpoints the peoples’ wish and right to express
their choice and future prospects. In addition, the professor is
reminded that a con stitutional referendum has already been held in
Somaliland in 2001 and that 97% of the people voted for the
withdrawal from the failed union of Somali Republic or Somali
Democratic Republic (whichever you call). The people of Somaliland
are at a point of NO return to uniting again with Somalia. Rest
assured for the professor he needs not to be concerned about any
border disputes in the future.
Finally, the recognition of Somaliland is an anchor for the security
and stability of the region in general and for Somalia in
particular. Somaliland plays a key role in the stability and
security of the region. Recognition of Somaliland will be a credit
to the human rights, democracy in the region since the Horn of
Africa region has always been a major cockpit for the world politics
and a playground for the world powers.
Somaliland is ready for helping Somalia out of the quagmire. The
Somali identity, socio-cultural and so cietal ties and cooperation
is what Somaliland strives for but not a political unity with
Somalia, the mo st failed state (The Economist, Sept. 10, 2016)
where the security is under a force of 22,000 foreign soldiers of
AMISOM from African countries under the joint a mandate of the UN
and AU and govern ment officials cannot visit the country let alone
govern them.
By:
Hussein Nur (International
Development Consultant, UK)
|